The premise:

Ok So here is the proposal

Geographical boundaries don't' matter, lets ignore them for the hypothetical.

If the entire world overthrew their governments and we allowed people to choose to join either a communist commune or an anarcho-capitalist commune.

IE they have free choice and people can do as they wish.

Would you be ok with this, or would you still call a worker in the anarcho-capitalist commune a slave and demand that they move to communism?

What follows is several pages of such discourse that I would prefer not to characterize it beyond my initial remarks.

Response:

I read through 4 pages for this...? Bah, what a preposterous set of statements some of you have been spouting.

While the topic is, arguably, an interesting intellectual exercise in 'what ifs' and it has certainly provided the opportunity for some to mentally masturbate their propagandistic political fetishes in front of everyone, the whole of the comments disregard some basic facts about human nature that renders either system impossible to be implemented in full as they may look on paper, regardless of how much that design may appeal to the proponent.

Point #1. People are naturally hierarchicists. When placed into a group there is a scramble amongst the members to determine who is the leader and where each member falls in the ranking system. The natural world is one of competition, as such; those that excel at the contest for resources enhance their survivability while those that do not are removed from the pool. To have complete equality invites stagnation and eventual downfall. Even amongst cooperative groups there is a struggle to rise through the ranks. Such competition is healthy as it promotes the strong, replicating its successes, and eliminates the weak, ensuring a stronger whole by it. To try to implement a system that ignores the basics of evolutionary psychology, sociology, and physiology is naïve at best, and foolish at worst.

Because of this there will always be a ruling class. Whether it is the priests/prophets, the warriors, the president, the chairman, the authoritarian governments, the corporations that rule covertly through their government connections, or committees that formulate the direction of a nation, it will never be banished. Leadership by the alpha is how we operate as a species.

In capitalistic societies, it is the dollar that they worship and in the communistic society it is political influence. They are both sides of the same coin. Both ideologies are veils over the true mechanism of human drive. Power over others by monopolizing the access to resources has always been the gist of the game regardless of what name it is called.

Point #2. To assert that no authority would be needed in purely communist society is absurd. Who would punish those that transgress against another? Who would prevent those that would attempt to take more than their fair share, or subvert the system for their own gain, as is part of human nature? Whether the desire is to enforce a system of equal sharing, or to keep the have-nots from taking from the haves, the use of force is necessary.

Conclusion: As is usual, those that advocate a particular system are the one's most likely to benefit from it. The communists see the wealth gained by others with envy and seek to take it from them and redistribute it to themselves and their allies, while those who hoard their wealth fight to keep others from it. Both sides are seeking to gain or keep resources and have constructed elaborate justifications for their wants.

Taken to the extreme, neither system is sustainable. As is often the case, the best bet is to examine the successful attributes of each system, and combine them into a new system by a process of synthesis.